Macomb County circuit judge won't disqualify himself from Prosecutor Peter Lucido case

A Macomb County circuit judge will not disqualify himself from presiding over a lawsuit the county prosecutor filed against the county's top attorney and ethics board.

The judge's decision is expected to be reviewed by the circuit court's chief judge.

Judge James Maceroni, in an order issued Aug. 29, denied Prosecutor Peter Lucido's motion for judicial disqualification, according to online court records.

Maceroni took the disqualification matter under advisement after a hearing Aug. 19. Lucido had raised concerns about a campaign contribution linked to Maceroni that Lucido argued created an appearance of impropriety as it relates to the lawsuit.

Todd Perkins, an attorney for the Republican prosecutor, filed a motion Aug. 12 after he discovered Maceroni contributed to the campaign of Christina Hines, the Democratic candidate for county prosecutor in the upcoming November general election. The date of the campaign contribution was more than seven months before the June 28 filing of Lucido's lawsuit, which is in Maceroni's court.

Perkins argued the $100 political contribution made to Hines' campaign on Nov. 15, 2023, is "not about the money, but a bias, the perception of what could be impropriety."

During the Aug. 19 hearing Maceroni said that is "a pretty typical donation," but Perkins responded it was not something the judge had disclosed.

Perkins could not be reached for comment.

County Corporation Counsel John Schapka, whom Lucido is suing, along with the ethics board, told the Free Press on Tuesday: "I'm very confident that the chief judge, upon review of Judge Maceroni's opinion and order, will affirm Judge Maceroni."

The opinion and order from Maceroni states: "A one-time $100.00 contribution cannot be said to have a significant and disproportionate influence on the electoral outcome for prosecuting attorney. The apparent effect that $100.00 has on this type of election is essentially nonexistent. This is especially true when a public endorsement does not accompany the contribution."

It states the size of the contribution "does not have serious risk of actual judicial bias as no influence is associated with this small of a donation" and that Lucido has not presented evidence that the $100 contribution is a significant portion of the total funds contributed to Hines' campaign.

The opinion and order states it was not "reasonably foreseeable" at the time the contribution was made that a civil action stemming from the ethics complaint would come before the court, and the one-time contribution was made at a fundraiser "as opposed to an unprompted, spontaneous campaign donation."

"No evidence has been presented as to a connection resulting in the alleged appearance of impropriety between the small monetary contribution to Hines political campaign and the decision before this Court on the remote matter of whether the Macomb County Ethics Board has jurisdiction to go forward with the ethics complaint," it states.

Also, it reads, the judicial code "specifically states that a judge or candidate for judicial office may contribute to a political party" and as it "expressly allows contribution of a judge to political campaigns such as prosecuting attorney, there is no reason to believe a $100.00 contribution will be classified as a financial dealing that a judge should refrain from partaking in."

No hearing is scheduled before the chief judge. A hearing is scheduled Sept. 23 before Maceroni on several motions in the lawsuit, including the defendants asking that it be dismissed fully or in part.

Mark Brewer, a former Michigan Democratic Party chairman, filed his first of two complaints against Lucido with the ethics board in February. Lucido's motion to disqualify the judge indicated Brewer is the leader and/or adviser for Hines' political campaign.

The ethics board dismissed one of Brewer's complaints and voted to forward the other to a public hearing. The remaining complaint alleges Lucido used county property, buildings and offices to create a photo of himself for political campaign purposes. Perkins has disputed the allegation. The public hearing has not been held.

Lucido asked Maceroni to refer the disqualification motion to the court's chief judge should Maceroni deny it. He and Perkins wanted the lawsuit to be referred to another judge by blind draw.

Contact Christina Hall: [email protected]. Follow her on X, formerly Twitter: @challreporter.

Support local journalism. Subscribe to the Free Press.

Submit a letter to the editor at freep.com/letters.

This article originally appeared on Detroit Free Press: Macomb Judge James Maceroni won't recuse himself from Peter Lucido case